It wasn't all good news though:

https://youtu.be/9EQfu4Glfhs via OMGUbuntu...

Have any LQ members purchased a Dell with Ubuntu pre-installed?

--jeremy

Yes, I have purchased 2 Dell computers with Ubuntu preinstalled. In both cases, I immediately replaced "Dellbuntu" with a different distribution.

Quite frankly, I suspect a significant percentage of these "Linux customers" are actually Windows users. Let me explain: an enterprise customer is probably not going to use the preinstalled operating system, whatever it is. They are going to re image the computer with their organization's Windows image, and they have a site license with Microsoft. So from that perspective, it is worth it to purchase the computers with Linux instead of Windows and save $100 per unit.

Even though you save some $$$, I still prefer getting PC's with Windows, then wiping it clean and installing a GNU/Linux OS (usually Slackware), that way I get a more current version of Windows for the VM. Otherwise I would still be using XP in a VM.

Do computers with Linux installed really sell for less than those with Windows pre-installed in the US? Because, form what I've seen here in the UK, the pre-installed Linux ones are generally more pricey models, which seem to cost more than the ones with Windows pre-installed for a given specification.

As of this writing, Dell charges US $101.50 less to configure their compatible business-class laptops with Ubuntu instead of Windows Pro.

Interesting, thanks, I may have to look into Dell should I need another laptop.

The problem is sales. " ‘Tens of Millions’ Dollars’ Worth of Linux Laptops'" sounds like a lot, but it's a drop in the bucket of Dell's total sales.

Walmart, for example, used to sell Dell systems with Linux pre-installed. They dropped the Linux boxes because they simply weren't selling well enough to make it worth doing. If you are Walmart, you need to sell an enormous amount of something to make it worth doing, and Walmart's market wanted Windows.

It's worth Dell's while to offer boxes with Linux pre-installed on line, where they can be configured and shipped to meet demand. It isn't worth their while to try to sell them through brick and mortar retailers, because they simply won't sell well enough.

Windows has won on the desktop. The folks who will use Linux instead are a tiny fraction of the market. Linux may arguably be "better", for suitable values of the term, but Windows is good enough. The issue confronting Linux is that it's different. Most folks get PCs to do work, and learn just enough about the system to be able to do the work. The work they do will be done by Windows applications. Switching to Linux requires learning a whole new set of apps to do the work, and a whole new OS the apps run on. The learning curve is steep, and most folks will say "I don't have time to get my work done now, let alone spend the time learning a whole new OS and set of apps to do it. Windows and Windows apps are what I know and do well enough. I'm staying put." This is a rational response from those who give it. Windows is good enough, and they don't need to explore Linux.
______
Dennis

I would argue that there is no problem. I do see Linus talking of "The Year Of The Linux Desktop" but I put it down to an odd sense of humour or some kind of masochism.
I've found little to moan at (bar side issues like Android) in Linux and use for a few years now.
I do see lots of ignorati stuck with Microsoft and whining as if they never actually read the agreements they signed.

I'd call it odd sense of humor. I think Linus is too realistic to be a masochist.

And in any case, Linux, properly speaking, is the OS kernel. That's under the hood in a lot of places. Android is a Linux system. A full Gnu/Linux system with standard utilities, window manager and the like, running on a desktop is simply an instance of a Linux system.

I've dual booted for years, and the current desktop is Win10 and Ubuntu.

I have a correspondent on the West Coast who picks up the odd spare change as a consultant for people who got nailed by viruses or malware in Windows. Most of them have simple needs - web browsing, email, Facebook - and he replaces Windows on their systems with Linux, and icons for the stuff they use front and center on their desktop. They can do what they wish, and never really have to deal with Linux at all. Thus far, all have been happy. (And no, they didn't read the EULAs they agreed to. And it might not have mattered if they had, because they'd have no idea what to do instead, and wouldn't see an alternative to accepting the EULA.)
______
Dennis

I keep reading about the new learning curve for Linux and that the curve is steep. This is usually in response to what "the average person" wants in a computer, and this average person is somebody who learned Windows well enough to do their work, and that's it. A few years ago I switched our five office Dell laptops that we use docked as workstations with external displays and keyboards over to Ubuntu. The response from our crew was anywhere from "what's so different" to elated not to have to work with Windows any more. Even the boxes that were running Photoshop now had Gimp 2.8 and now, a few years into the project, nobody would want to go back to PS. Libra Office is so similar in form and function to Word that most of us didn't even notice the switch. The biggest difference is that Office will open any Word doc, which Word will not unless you have the right edition. The more intensive users had to learn a few new keystrokes here and there. But the positive tradeoffs, no more crashes, invasive updates, and all of the over things Windows users have been complaining about for years, not having to deal with those was certainly worth the small effort to embrace the change. My own workstation is still running !2.04, simply because it has NEVER crashed nor given me any problems so why upgrade? The rest run 14.04, and run flawlessly. Hey, I even changed over my grandaughters' own laptop from W7 to Ubuntu and never told them about it. They never asked. All their games run just fine.

Left Windows a few years ago and never looked back. BTW, We do publishing, lots of photo manipulating and Websites, plus a lot of other projects on our computers. I do miss Photoshop from time to time for the very few things it does better than Gimp, but I do still have one W7 box for that rare need. Of course, I have to endure waiting 5 minutes for it to boot up and install all the latest updates . . .